Until this year, food companies—often the target of Proposition 65 enforcement actions—have been limited to specific “full-length” language for Prop 65 warnings, without explicit guidance regarding whether short-form warnings could be used as a safe harbor warning for food products and non-alcoholic beverages. Prior to the implementation of amended regulations this year, Prop 65 regulations required the following full-length warnings for food products containing a listed carcinogen or reproductive toxicant:Continue Reading Navigating the Legal Soup: A New “Short-Form” Recipe for Prop 65 Warnings on Food and Beverages

The current commercial real estate market has faced ongoing distress across various asset classes for several years. In the Practical Real Estate Lawyer article, “Primer on Commercial Real Estate Loan Workouts and Right-Sizing,” Sheppard Mullin Real Estate, Energy, Land Use & Environmental partner Richard Fries explores both traditional solutions for managing a distressed commercial real estate loan and suggests an innovative approach to right-sizing distressed real estate debt and assets. This approach applies regardless of the type of real estate asset or its location or emotional factors involved. Real estate right-sizing, meticulously aligned with economic factors, market conditions, asset specifics, recourse, sponsor reputation, the parties’ relationship and legal predictability, may emerge as the most appealing and enduring solution for distressed commercial real estate today.Continue Reading Primer on Commercial Real Estate Loan Workouts and Right-Sizing

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (collectively, Services) proposed last week to rescind the regulatory definition of “harm” under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), sparking intense criticism from environmental advocacy groups. If finalized, the rescission would remove a longstanding protection for the habitat of wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA, making regulatory compliance easier for many types of projects across the country. But it would also set up a potential collision between the current president’s deregulation efforts and one of several bills that California’s Legislature is considering as a way to compensate for potential “backsliding” of federal environmental protections, with the regulated community in California likely to be among the losers.Continue Reading Federal Proposal to Rescind ESA’s ‘Harm’ Definition Raises the Stakes for California’s AB 1319

Our previous post[1] covered the introduction of A.B. 303 (Addis), the “Battery Energy Safety and Accountability Act”, following a catastrophic fire at one of the world’s largest battery energy storage facilities located in Moss Landing, California, starting on January 16, 2025. As we explained, that bill, proposed as an urgency statute, would significantly curtail the authority of both local agencies and the California Energy Commission (CEC) to site new energy storage facilities and would likely result in significant adverse consequences for meeting California’s clean energy goals.Continue Reading California Leaders Move to Support Energy Storage

This report provides an overview of major federal environmental regulations and court decisions of 2024. Landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions with lasting consequences for environmental policy include Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (2024),1 which ended judicial deference to administrative agencies, and Corner Post v. Federal Reserve, 603 U.S. 799 (2024), which opened the doors of federal courts to many more plaintiffs challenging regulations. These decisions have subsequently bolstered efforts to limit or rollback regulatory actions, both by industry and by members of the Trump administration. The Congressional Review Act (CRA), which allows Congress to rescind or invalidate new regulations, has also been used as the basis for invalidating many of the environmental regulations adopted since August 2024.Continue Reading Environmental YIR: 2024 Regulatory Legacies and Impacts

In a further effort to revitalize and reimagine its downtown core, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors has passed and the Mayor has signed legislation exempting certain residential conversion projects from development impact fees, including the City’s substantial inclusionary housing fee. The legislation exempts projects that replace non-residential uses with residential uses from development impact fees and affordable housing requirements and removes the deadline to apply to the City’s Commercial to Residential Adaptive Reuse Program.Continue Reading San Francisco Further Incentivizes Residential Conversion Projects by Waiving Development Impact Fees

On 20 January 2025, France published a memorandum urging the EU to modify the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (Directive 2022/2464, “CSRD”), and to postpone the application of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (Directive 2024/1760, “CS3D”). France’s statements resonate with the series of Executive Orders aiming in the U.S. at various markets deregulations, although to a lesser degree.Continue Reading Corporate Sustainability Obligations in the EU: France Urges the EU To Postpone the Application of Adopted EU Directives

As we enter 2025 amid the devastating Los Angeles fires[1] and with a new presidential administration, we continue our series of yearly reviews of the most significant governmental actions taken by the state of California relevant to climate change in the previous year.[2]Continue Reading 2024 In Review: California Climate Change Legislation, Policy and Regulation

Short-form warnings for products that may expose consumers to chemicals on California’s Prop 65 list must now include at least one chemical name to qualify for Prop 65’s “safe harbor” protections—with one caveat. Businesses may continue to use the previous version of the short-form warning on consumer products through the end of 2027.Continue Reading Name That Chemical: California Adds New Requirement for Prop 65 Short-Form Warnings

A week after a large-scale fire at the Moss Landing Power Plant in Monterey County,[1] California Assemblymember Dawn Addis (D-Morro Bay) introduced Assembly Bill (AB) 303. If passed, AB 303 – also referred to as the Battery Energy Safety & Accountability Act – will impact the development of large-scale battery energy storage system (BESS) projects in California. Intended to “improve safety standards and restore local oversight for [BESS] facilities in California,”[2] AB 303 will, among other things, limit approval authority to local governmental agencies, require local engagement in the permitting process, and establish mandatory buffer zones between BESS projects and “sensitive receptors.”Continue Reading Understanding AB 303: Potential Impacts for California BESS Project Development